RE: Starter comments on WCAG 2.0 draft

Yes Gregg, now and in future.
Xhtml is xml-based and not well-formed code stop the code representation. Passing from html to xml-based languages, validity is important for rendering of the code.
Here Jez explain well.http://www.juicystudio.com/article/validity-accessibility.php
Also assistive technologies browse wecontent following the DOM tree of the page: break the tree means break reading.

----- Messaggio originale -----
    Da: "Gregg Vanderheiden"<gv@trace.wisc.edu>
    Inviato: 25/07/05 20.46.07
    A: "w3c-wai-au@w3.org"<w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
    Oggetto: RE: Starter comments on WCAG 2.0 draft
      
    Did you mean it didn't work for everyone?   
    
    Gregg
    
     -- ------------------------------ 
    Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
    Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
    Director - Trace R & D Center 
    University of Wisconsin-Madison 
    
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org] On Behalf
    Of Roberto Scano (IWA/HWG)
    Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 1:11 PM
    To: jan.richards@utoronto.ca; w3c-wai-au@w3.org
    Subject: RE: Starter comments on WCAG 2.0 draft
    
    
    
    
    ----- Messaggio originale -----
        Da: "Jan Richards"<jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
          [3] Validity debate:
        
        COMMENT: My personal view is that validity is probably not "necessary 
        for a minimum level of accessibility" (i.e. a level 1 success criteria 
        item), but perhaps should be retained at a higher level.
        
        Roberto:
    If an authoring tool generates xhtml and it's no valid, when served as
    application/xhtml+xml some browsers end the page execution: this means no
    accessibility for all. 
    
    
    
    
    
    
        

[Messaggio troncato. Toccare Modifica->Segna per il download per recuperare la restante parte.]

Received on Monday, 25 July 2005 18:54:36 UTC